The Patriot Fourth Estate Takes on the Fifth Column

The Coup Against 45:?Whether you are Democrat or Republican, there can now be no denying the machinations of the Hillary Clinton campaign, together with the DNC and their web?of?federal?co-conspirators in the Obama administration. If you are Democrat and think this is acceptable, you are the enemy of every American. If you identify as Republican and view this only in partisan terms, you are little more than a useful idiot. If you are independent, you have no excuse. This episode is just a sampling of the worldwide corruption of the geopolitical establishment and its deep state tentacles. God save our Republic.

The Sedition Lobby:?Since the mass media has been instructed to give this story a good leaving alone, it does not get the attention it deserves. What started out as maybe some bungling and perhaps petty malfeasance among middling FBI people, has now progressed up to include the former CIA Director, former Attorney General and Former FBI Director. Those are some pretty big fish. They are also the sorts of people who meet with the President and his top aids on a regular basis. [READ MORE]

MONUMENTAL: The Naked Truth About Robert Mueller – The former Bush-Obama ?FBI Director has a long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people. His many actions are a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence. He lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.

I do not make these statements lightly. Each time I prepared to question Mueller during Congressional hearings, the more concerned I became about his ethics and behavior. As I went back to begin compiling all of that information in order to recount personal interactions with Mueller, the more clearly the big picture began to come into focus. [READ MORE]

H.A.L.P.E.R. Spells Game Up for Obama’s Spies:??The justification peddled to and bought by the NYT is that the FBI agents and their contractor Halper?were just trying to protect Trump from the Russians. I may be na?ve, but I should think that spying on all the communications of a political candidate and his associates (and unmasking and leaking what might help his opponent) seem a preposterous justification when a meeting to convey their concerns would have been more than adequate. It sounds like an after-the-fact weak justification for otherwise inexplicable conduct. [READ MORE]

Mueller Coup Bill is a Threat to the Constitution: The bill doesn’t just empower an endless coup effort by Mueller and his team of Clinton/Obama allies. It provides for a dramatic power shift. It allows DOJ figures and judicial allies to launch a permanent investigation, much like the one aimed at Trump, that turns into an endless witch hunt. [READ MORE]

Swamp Things in the Russia Investigation: “The Swamp” usually refers to the vast federal bureaucratic machinery of mostly unelected top officials who exercise influence and power without worry about the appearance of conflicts of interest. They are often exempt from the consequences of the laws and regulations that affect others. The chief characteristics of the swamp are the interlocking friendships, business relationships, marriages and partnerships in Washington, and their immune response against anyone who challenges them. [READ MORE]

Turns out there really was foreign collusion in the 2016 US presidential election. UK spies colluded with Obama hold-overs in the US deep state to try and get Hillary elected. When that failed they invented “Russiagate” to try and overthrow the US election. Will President Trump wake up and see the danger that the US intelligence agencies pose not only to his presidency, but to the whole country?

Former CIA Officer and whistleblower Kevin Shipp says what is going on with Donald J. Trump “is an ongoing coup to remove a duly elected President.” Shipp contends, “This is a huge constitutional crisis like the country has never seen before. This makes Watergate look like a Sunday school class.”

On Friday, Shipp and other retired top officials at the CIA, FBI, DOJ and NSA held a press conference and demanded Attorney General Jeff Sessions prosecute top Obama era officials for obvious crimes against the incoming Trump Administration. Shipp says, “We have a coup within our government right now at the senior levels at the CIA, DOJ and the FBI attempting to unseat a duly elected President who was elected by the American people and remove him from office. . . .This is, at worst, treason with senior officials in the shadow government or Deep State . . . to attack Donald Trump and remove him from office.

We have not seen anything like this since the Presidency of John F. Kennedy (JFK), when CIA Director Allen Dulles attacked him, and we saw what happened there. . . . There is crystal clear evidence that the CIA was, at least, involved with the cover-up of the JFK assassination.? Now, we have the same thing happening again. . . . Remember what Chuck Schumer said, and it was chilling.? He said, ‘If you cross the intelligence community, they can hit back at you six ways from Sunday.’? That’s what we are seeing now.? It’s collusion or a coup with senior officials at the FBI, DOJ and CIA along with Robert Mueller to unseat an elected president.”

Shipp goes on to explain, “There is essentially a civil war involving parts of senior management and upper parts of our government that is occurring in the United States. It’s between the ‘Dark’ side and the ‘Constitutional’ side.? There has never been anything like this in history.? It is extremely serious, and this is an extremely serious hour for our government and especially for our constitutional freedoms. . . . This essentially is a global criminal cabal that has penetrated into our government and now has senior level officials colluding and, I would argue, conspiring to unseat this president.”

Greg Hunter

In closing, Shipp says, “People need to understand that the Democrat Party today is not the Democrat Party of John F. Kennedy. The Democrat Party with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is more Marxist than anything else.? They think the Constitution should be a ‘progressive’ document.? In other words, the Constitution is outdated and should be redone.? They are both directly connected into George Soros, who wants to destroy the sovereignty of the U.S. government. . . . The Democrat Party is now made up of Marxists and leftists that have penetrated that entire organization. . . . Their entire goal is to change our form of government and destroy our sovereignty.”

Wall Street, with their many tentacles, controls the 6 large media conglomerates. Those companies don’t want an independent media based on the concepts of nationalism and anti-globalism. They are globalist entities, so they will naturally fight against those who threaten their precious profit machines.

YouTube and Facebook are censoring sites and posts promoting nationalism and populism. They pretend they aren’t, but we know better, as popular sites promoting conservative values, populism and nationalism have been censored, or, in the case of YouTube, they have been demonetized.

The world has been turning away from the ideology of globalism, and, as a result, the globalists are fighting back. They won’t give up without a fight, of course, but they are losing this war. The narrative is shifting. Independent voices are being heard, despite the globalists attempts to silence them.

This year’s farm bill was, like many farm bills to come before it, chock full of business handouts carefully disguised as essential support for the hearty people of the heartland.?The corporate welfare in the farm bill is likely to end up on President Donald Trump’s desk anyway, even after a surprising defeat in the House.?[READ MORE]

#

Also See:?The Disaster of?Federal Farm Policy

Congress is now working on a new farm bill to cover the next four years handouts. The odds of budgetary decency breaking out are slim and none – and “Slim just left town,” as Dan Rather liked to say. But the perennial failures of farm programs remain one of the starkest reminders of why Washington’s power and spending needs to be radically slashed across the board.

Federal policies are far more irrational, wasteful, and oppressive than they are usually portrayed. Leviathan has been greatly aided by a mainstream media that often utterly fails to understand the programs or interventions – and is accustomed to being spoonfed by politicians and government flacks. [READ MORE]

Is anyone still wondering how a group of high school students managed to pull off a huge, highly organized, multi-million dollar rally involving hundreds of thousands of people across the country, all in a matter of weeks?

Love him or hate him, Glenn Beck has long demonstrated his masterful ability to connect the dots in the darkest corners of our corrupt geopolitical world. He is a logician with a theologian’s zeal, a savant of Marxist-Socialism, and the leading??Sorosologist of our time.

As the push to disarm law-abiding Americans intensifies on all fronts, Mr. Beck and his stalwart team of researchers shine the light on the dark money and power behind the recent ‘March For Our Lives’ propaganda effort.?[WATCH HERE]

Right to Keep and Bear Arms: Some ruminating on rifles, militias, and the recent attacks by the left on the Second Amendment from some respected American thinkers.

Is the Second Amendment for Just the Militia? Leftists lost this battle long ago, because suggesting that the Second Amendment applies only to protect a “state-sponsored militia” and not “the people” was always a losing battle when fought on the grounds of reason.??The only way this “militia” boondoggle could succeed would be through revisionist assumptions about a “living Constitution” and judicial activism, not observation of history or honest appraisal of our Constitution’s purpose. [READ MORE]

What Is a Militia, Anyway??As??a simple declarative sentence, despite the unnecessary use of commas typical of 18th-century writing, the amendment is perfectly clear to anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of English.??Yet in recent decades, it has become the source of lies, distortion, and obfuscation by assorted opponents of the Bill of Rights who claim that only members of a militia may own guns. [READ MORE]

‘Assault Weapon’: The Semantic Trojan Horse.?The expression “assault weapon” is a semantic Trojan horse that represents a real threat to our constitutional rights.??Since it does not define the weapons in question, it can be used to define anything people want to get rid of, starting with semi-automatic long guns and ending with revolvers and even ammunition.??“Banning” such weapons means a whole lot more than merely ceasing their sale; it addresses the guns already in the hands of citizens.??It addresses this issue through the holy grail of lefties everywhere: confiscation.?[READ MORE]

Washington, D.C.— Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said Tuesday during an appearance on The Laura Ingraham Show podcast that the term “deep state” accurately describes how an unelected bureaucracy of national security officials in positions of power exert influence without Congressional oversight.

“Absolutely, there is a deep state, because the deep state is the intelligence agencies that do not have oversight,” he said. “Only eight people in Congress know what they’re doing, and traditionally, those eight people have been a rubber stamp to let the intelligence communities do whatever they want. There is no skeptic among the eight people that are supposedly overseeing the intelligence community.”?[READ MORE]

We have crossed the boundary that lies between Republic and Empire. If you ask when, the answer is that you cannot make a single stroke between day and night. The precise moment does not matter. There was no painted sign to say, “You now are entering Imperium.” Yet it was a very old road and the voice of history was saying: “Whether you know it or not, the act of crossing may be irreversible.” And now, not far ahead, is a sign that reads: “No U Turns.”

If you say there were no frightening omens, that is true. The political foundations did not quake; the graves of the Fathers did not fly open; the Constitution did not tear itself up. If you say people did not will it, that also is true. But if you say therefore it has not happened, then you have been so long bemused by words that your mind will not believe what the eye can see, even as in the jungle the terrified primitive, on meeting the lion, importunes magic by saying to himself, “He is not there.” That a republic may vanish is an elementary schoolbook fact.?[READ MORE]

As the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation pressed on during the 2016 election, a senior official with the Obama justice department, identified as Matthew Axelrod, called former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe – who thought the DOJ was pressuring him to shut down the investigation, according to the recently released inspector general’s (OIG) report.

Chappaquiddick Wasn’t the Only Scandal

There is nothing like historical context to help evaluate and better understand current events. So, in regard to the mainstream media’s breathless, non-stop coverage of the self-levitating Trump-Russia collusion theory, consider this bit of trivia:

In 1991, when Russian President Boris Yeltsin opened the archives of the Soviet Central Committee, Western researchers quickly descended on Moscow to plow through the treasure trove of previously classified official documents.

Among those researchers was Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the?London Times?and the BBC who found a May 14, 1983 letter from KGB chief Viktor Chebrikov to Soviet General Secretary Yuri Andropov. Bearing the highest security classification, it summarized a confidential offer by Senator Ted Kennedy to the Soviet leadership to help stop President Ronald Reagan’s aggressive, anti-Soviet defense policies.

Sebastian reported his find in an article titled “Teddy, the KGB and the top secret file” which appeared in the February 2, 1992, London Times. And there the story remained unheeded and unheralded until 2006 when historian Paul Kengor published The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism?in which he discussed Kennedy’s secret approach to the Soviets.

In an appendix to his book, Kengor reproduced Chebrikov’s classified missive unedited and unabridged along with extensive documentation establishing its authenticity.

Marked “Special Importance” and bearing the heading “Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Y. V. Andropov,” the letter reported that former California Senator John Tunney had secretly contacted the Soviets on behalf of Kennedy. According to Chebrikov, Kennedy was “very troubled” by poor U.S.-Soviet relations which he blamed on “Reagan’s belligerence.” Kennedy was reported to be “very impressed with the activities of Y. V. Andropov and other Soviet leaders.”

“According to Kennedy,” reported Chebrikov, “the current threat is due to the President’s refusal to engage any modification to his politics.” That refusal was exacerbated by Reagan’s political success, which made the president more obstinate and re-electable. The memorandum then recites Kennedy’s advice that “The only real [political] threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations. These issues, according to the senator, will without doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

As set forth in the letter, “Kennedy believes that, given the state of current affairs, and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan.”

One step would be for Andropov to invite Kennedy to Moscow for a personal meeting. Chebrikov stated, “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.”

Chebrikov stated that Kennedy recommended a public relations program to help the Soviets improve their image with the American public. He believed that the Soviets’ problems resulted from their inability to counter Reagan’s “propaganda.”

According to Chebrikov, “Kennedy believes that in order to influence Americans it would be important to organize in August-September of this year [1983], televised interviews with Y. V. Andropov in the USA” to make a “direct appeal” to the American people. In this regard, Chebrikov stated that “Kennedy and his friends” were willing to help and listed Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters as good candidates for interviews with Andropov.

The letter advised that implementation of this plan was a matter of urgency since Reagan was well on his way to re-election in 1984. It concluded with a discussion of Kennedy’s presidential prospects in that year and noted that Kennedy “underscored that he eagerly awaits a reply to his appeal.”

As author and historian Paul Kengor has observed, “if the memo is in fact an accurate account of what transpired, it constitutes a remarkable example of the lengths to which some on the political left, including a sitting U.S. senator, were willing to go to stop Ronald Reagan.”

So, what was the reaction of the mainstream media when this alarming document was made public? According to Paul Kengor, not a single American news organization picked up the?London Times?story.

Similarly, when Kengor published his book which discussed and reproduced the letter, he “couldn’t get a single major news source to do a story on it. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC. Not one covered it.” And “all mainstream sources” turned down his proffered op-eds regarding Chebrikov’s letter.

Think about that. Here is a classified document found in the Soviet archives from the head of the secret police to the General Secretary spelling out an outrageous and treasonous political plot by Kennedy to enlist the Soviet Union’s assistance in his campaign for the presidency. And not one major media outlet uttered so much as a peep about it.

The discovery of Chebrikov’s letter describing Kennedy’s media advice to Andropov and his efforts to make the Soviet Union a partisan political ally was in and of itself worthy of media coverage. But, beyond that, consider the subtext and clear inference to be drawn from what Kennedy was reportedly telling the Soviets about Reagan’s major point of political vulnerability, i.e., “the problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations.”

Did Kennedy, in effect, actually tell the Soviets to ratchet up the threat of nuclear war as a means of helping him defeat Reagan? If so, had he taken into account the fact such increased tensions could take an unexpected turn and inadvertently result in such a war? Was he actually willing to risk that in order to win the presidency? Or was Kennedy of such limited intelligence that he didn’t comprehend the dangers posed by his secret outreach and suggestions to the Soviets?

Regardless of the answers, it is astonishing that not one media organization saw fit to ask these questions or to even report the discovery of this explosive document. And the fact that it has remained unreported by the mainstream media all of these years is itself a scandal and quite telling.

The media’s failure to even report or discuss the discovery and contents of Chebrikov’s letter is but one more example of their dishonesty. The fact that they have ignored this story should tell us all that we need to know about their integrity, fairness, and allegiance to the truth. How many more examples of their blatant bias and duplicity do we need before we completely discount all of their reportage as nothing more than progressive agitprop and propaganda?

As a wise man once said, if the mainstream media didn’t have double standards, they would have no standards at all. For further proof of that statement, one need only to compare and contrast the media’s fevered, unhinged coverage of the alleged Trump-Russia collusion theory with the protective cone of silence they have placed over “Teddy, the KGB and the top secret file.”

#

George Parry is a?former federal and state prosecutor who practices law in Philadelphia and blogs at?knowledgeisgood.net.

Whether you know it or not, you are at war. It’s not a shooting in the street war, at least not yet, but it is a war. Specifically, the people in charge have decided to wage war on segments of the American society. To paraphrase the late historian?Christopher Lasch, the managerial elite has?turned their back on average Americans and opted instead for a ruthlessly cosmopolitan view of life, one that values rootlessness, internationalism and?transience. Increasingly, their ends are in direct conflict with liberal democracy.

You probably haven’t even heard about it, but yesterday there was an exchange in the Supreme Court that future generations will regard as one of the most significant revelations of our political era.

The case of Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky concerns a Minnesota statute that broadly bans all political apparel at the polling place. When Andrew Cilek went to vote in 2010, he wore a shirt bearing the image of the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag and a button that read “Please I.D. Me.” The poll worker asked him to remove the shirt and button because it supposedly violated the state law.

Cilek filed a lawsuit opposing the regulation as an infringement on his First Amendment right to political expression.?He also noted that the standard for what is acceptable is arbitrary and the enforcement itself could be politicized since the polling workers are chosen by local political parties.

In the oral arguments, Justice Alito agreed that the law does seem arbitrary and observed that “so many things have political connotations, and the connotations are in the eye of the beholder.” How could any poll worker, he asked, be even-handed in enforcing the regulation?

Daniel Rogan, who defended the statute for the state before the Court, responded that the political speech being conveyed by the wearer had to be “understood as relating to electoral choices and it has to be well-known.”

Alito said “that makes it worse” since the poll worker applying the “reasonable person” standard has to not only recognize the clothing is political speech but well known political speech.

Rogan answered that what the standard meant was it would have to be something a reasonable person would consider “clearly political” and “something that’s going to be reasonably understood by voters in the polling place.” What followed was a line of questioning by Judge Alito that will go down in the history books as a prime example of liberal cluelessness and hypocrisy.

The exchange has to be seen in full to appreciate the devastating effect, so I’ll reprint each part and note which examples of clothing Rogan considers “political” and what he views as “not political”:

JUSTICE ALITO: How about a shirt with a rainbow flag? Would that be permitted?

MR. ROGAN: A shirt with a rainbow flag? No, it would — yes, it would be — it would be permitted unless there was — unless there was an issue on the ballot that — that related somehow to — to gay rights.

Rogan’s conclusion: A symbol for a liberal cause (gay rights) is not political (unless there is something directly related to the issue on the ballot), and thus would be allowed.

JUSTICE ALITO: How about a shirt that says “Parkland Strong”?

ROGAN: No, that would – that would be — that would be allowed. I think -- I think, Your Honor --

JUSTICE ALITO: Even though gun control would very likely be an issue?

[Rogan hems and haws for a few moments while Alito pins him down]

ROGAN: I — I think — I think today that I — that would be — if — if that was in Minnesota, and it was “Parkland Strong,” I — I would say that that would be allowed in, that there’s not --

Rogan’s conclusion: A symbol for a liberal cause (gun control) is not political, and thus would be allowed.

JUSTICE ALITO: Okay. How about an NRA shirt?

ROGAN: An NRA shirt? Today, in Minnesota, no, it would not, Your Honor. I think that that’s a clear indication — and I think what you’re getting at, Your Honor --

Rogan’s conclusion: A symbol for a conservative cause (gun rights) would be political, and thus not allowed.

JUSTICE ALITO: How about a shirt with the text of the Second Amendment?

ROGAN: Your Honor, I — I – I think that that could be viewed as political, that that — that would be — that would be –

Rogan’s conclusion: The text of an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution would be considered political because it is primarily supported by conservatives, and thus not allowed.

Rogan’s conclusion: Wearing clothes referring to politicians who have been out of office for decades is political, and thus not allowed.

I don’t know much about Mr. Rogan, but I suspect that most people would consider him to be a reasonable person. Yet when asked to apply the “reasonable observer” standard, Rogan consistently considered views on the left to be “non-political” and views on the right to be “political.”

How could such a reasonable person be so clueless? The late novelist David Foster Wallace tells an old joke about fish and water that can help us see the problem:

“There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”

There’s also an old saying that fish are the last to discover water. Something similar could be said about liberals and their left-leaning bias. They are the last to discover political bias because they assume what they believe about the world is the standard by which all other views must judged. While other people are being “political” they are merely being “reasonable.”

Christians should consider what it means for us to trust our most sacred rights—especially our rights to speech and religious freedom—to such “reasonable observers.”

#

Joe Carter is a Senior Editor at the Acton Institute. Joe also serves as an editor at the The Gospel Coalition, a communications specialist for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, and as an adjunct professor of journalism at Patrick Henry College. He is the editor of the NIV Lifehacks Bible and co-author of How to Argue like Jesus: Learning Persuasion from History’s Greatest Communicator (Crossway).

Could it be that Brennan himself is the leaker of classified information and is up to his eyeballs in using foreign sources to gather dirt on President Trump for the purpose of keeping him?out of the White House???Brennan’s briefing of Sen. Harry Reid, which included information from the Steele dossier, certainly is a key indicator of his participation in the campaign to keep or kick Donald Trump out of the White House.

It would seem that the trip to Russia we should be investigating is not Carter Page’s, but rather John Brennan’s. [READ MORE]

Every minute of these podcasts is packed with important information and it’s worth every syllable. Stunning work by Dan Bongino and a host of real journalists untangling an incredible web of deceit and betrayal — a betrayal of democracy, justice, and Constitutional oaths, not to mention the American People.

Again, be sure to READ THE SHOW NOTES from independent journalists helping to sift through the lies of the biggest scandal — and now the biggest coverup — in our Nation’s history. Check out Dan’s great sponsors, too.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is an agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the development of emerging technologies for use by the military. (Wikipedia)

Well, once upon a time they had a little project called LifeLog that was intended to chronicle every crumb of every person’s physical and emotional existence. The ACLU, at a time when they still cared about constitutionality, decried the project as a massive violation of privacy.

Subsequently, the noble Pentagonians chose to scrap their plans on February 4, 2004…the very same day that Facebook was born, which ironically would chronicle every crumb of every person’s physical and emotional existence.

What a coincidence.

On its own Website, Pentagon publicists proudly claim that DARPA is “creating breakthrough technologies and capabilities for — wait for it — national security. Another dubious attempt at convincing you to surrender your Liberty for a little bit of security.

To the law-abiding-therefore-I-have-nothing-to-hide crowd: indeed, you have nothing to fear until the day that a group of people bent on monitoring and controlling populations starts passing legislation that outlaws your certain behaviors, movements, thoughts, speech, or political and religious interests.

Oh, wait, that’s already happening.

You see, violating your Fourth Amendment is the pathway to gutting your First Amendment. And that, my friends, is the fast track to slavery with no road back, except for a very dangerous one.

The Patriot Fourth Estate Takes on the Fifth Column

Real Collusion: Did individuals conspire in secret (that’s what collude means) to affect the outcome in the 2016 presidential election? Absolutely. Did this collusion threaten American democracy? Without a doubt. But the party responsible is not who you’ve been misled to believe. It’s looking like Obama officials (with help from HRC, the DNC, the United Kingdom, Australia and Ukraine along the way) may have set up the Trump campaign and undermined law to utilize defense intelligence tools for the purposes of illegal spying. The only real question remaining is how deep it goes — or rather how high up.

Ladies, the floor is yours.

Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist

Comey’s Memos Indicate Dossier Briefing Of Trump Was A Setup: Newly released memos from former FBI director James Comey indicate that an early 2017 briefing for Trump on the contents of an unverified dossier was part of a setup to enable media to report on the the most salacious details of the dossier.

Sara A. Carter

New Documents Show Obama Officials, FBI Coordinated in Anti-Trump Probe:? Documents obtained by congressional investigators suggest possible coordination by Obama White House officials, the CIA and the FBI into the investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign. Those senior Obama officials used unsubstantiated evidence to launch allegations in the media that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia during the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

Sharyl Atkisson

Collusion Against Trump Timeline: Evidence has emerged in the past year that makes it clear there were organized efforts to collude against candidate Donald Trump–and then President Trump.